...a few others that I forgot to include:Like the book thread, but after butchersapron mentioned Class War and LynnDoyleCooper mentioned Aufheben and given how so many groups used a paper or whatever as their “outreach” tool, be interesting to see which ones hit home...
For me (roughly chronologically):
Do or Die
Earth First! Journal
Echanges et Mouvement
you're all over the place!Daily Express on the bus to work at 16 because my dad read it.
Daily Mirror on the bus as I realised the Express was crap.
The Guardian on the bus as my politics changed, that was 45 years ago.
The Observer till my politics drifted rightward and I started reading the Sunday Times.
On and off, Socialist Worker, Private Eye, New Statesman.
Now back reading the Observer.
Have you read Pacifism as Pathology by Ward Churchill? That argues a similar case.Never really got into the zine scene. But I was a bit of a weird teenager in that I was really into news and current affairs when others were into drinking cider in the park and stuff. I used to watch Question Time and Newsnight on top of news bulletins and the Sunday politics programmes.
In terms of reading, though, it was mostly newspapers, mostly the Guardian through the week and Saturdays and then the Sunday Times, which I used to lie down on my belly and read it spread out all over the floor (except the sports section). And also the Manchester Evening News. I often read others though, I had no blind loyalty, would pick up others depending on the front pages and if the teasers tickled my fancy, but those were my defaults.
I also read Private Eye and the Economist from a weirdly early age.
And then came across Red Pepper when I was a student. I've been through phases reading that.
Also New Internationalist and Ethical Consumer magazine.
And more not-print stuff via SchNEWS and IndyMedia websites.
But my reason for posting was really to mention something that's not a periodical but was eye-opening and thought-provoking in terms of shaping my political thinking: Peter Gelderloos' How Nonviolence Protects the State, a copy of which was given to me by a friend after a discussion in which we disagreed about protesters rioting/damaging stuff and I was firmly in the pacifist/nonviolence camp.
I was convinced by it, it completely changed my mind in terms if previously believing that rioting and violent direct action was bad, unconscionable, reflected badly on the 'good protesters' and whatever cause was being supported/protested against. But there were so many examples of people only winning their hard-earned rights not through politely asking for them or writing letters or signing petitions, but by demanding them and kicking off, using violence (against police and/or property) - sometimes as a direct response to State violence, a reaction to being physically attacked, but other times as a tactic.
For example, the Suffragettes, the US civil rights movement, Stonewall riot, etc.
It was a bit of a lightbulb moment.
So now instead of blanket and outright condemnation, which used to be my knee-jerk response, I now think it can be a valid reaction/tactic. And fuck, the State uses it all the time to oppress people, and sometimes you've got to fight fire with fire.
What was Crowbar?New Society